USS Vengeance & Mass Destruction.

TOS had planetary populations wiped out like flies, 10 of billions of sentient beings over the course of it, crewmen/women dying every episode, a lot of the plots revolving around loss of life. It was a damned depressing series for it and has the highest death toll of all Trek.

I think I'm more annoyed by the fact that the driving force behind Star Trek is now death.

Click to expand...

What just because the planets the are attacked or destroyed are ones we care about now instead on the god knows how many one shot planets that were obliterated in TOS that the audience wasn't given much reason to care about other than the scary thing this episode is destructive.

Click to expand...

I think I have an idea on how to respond to your post, but I don't want to right now because I might misinterpret what you were trying to say. Could you elaborate your points a more structured manner?

Click to expand...

In TOS when ever a big scary monster like thing be it a doomsday machine, a giant amoeba, a pissed off NASA probe, or whatever shows up they show how badass it is by having it destroyed a space station, starship, or planet much like goes on in JJtrek.

The only difference is that this time instead of using oneshot planets nobody gives a crap about (seeing as I haven't heard any complaints about using time travel to save them or how the crew sucks for failing to save them) Abrams an co. used planets and places people actually give a crap about.

So really their not doing anything different this time, its just that people care about the places being destroyed.

What just because the planets the are attacked or destroyed are ones we care about now instead on the god knows how many one shot planets that were obliterated in TOS that the audience wasn't given much reason to care about other than the scary thing this episode is destructive.

Click to expand...

I think I have an idea on how to respond to your post, but I don't want to right now because I might misinterpret what you were trying to say. Could you elaborate your points a more structured manner?

Click to expand...

In TOS when ever a big scary monster like thing be it a doomsday machine, a giant amoeba, a pissed off NASA probe, or whatever shows up they show how badass it is by having it destroyed a space station, starship, or planet much like goes on in JJtrek.

The only difference is that this time instead of using oneshot planets nobody gives a crap about (seeing as I haven't heard any complaints about using time travel to save them or how the crew sucks for failing to save them) Abrams an co. used planets and places people actually give a crap about.

So really their not doing anything different this time, its just that people care about the places being destroyed.

Click to expand...

And also, with a higher budget, the destruction is shown more graphically.

Isn't attempting to prevent death the driving force in almost all of Trek?

Click to expand...

Yeah, and this new take sucks at it. Try to save everyone in the meeting room? Nope. Khan kills a good chunk of them. Try to reason with the Klingons? Nope. Khan starts a fight which leaves all of the Klingons dead. Try to capture Admiral Marcus alive? Nope. Khan brutally kills him. Try to stop the Vengeance from crashing into San Francisco after restoring power to the Enterprise's system? Nope. We don't even get a "There's not much power!" or anything as to why the Enterprise didn't try and prevent the Vengeance from crashing. They just sit there.

Click to expand...

Doesn't this simply show that the stakes are horribly high, and that the Enterprise and her crew are against insurmountable odds?

I really wonder what the Enterprise, even at full power and structural integrity, could do to stop a ship more than 3 times its size from crashing. No tractor beam could haul the Vengeance in. And the Enterprise was already severely battered, it's unfair to say the crew just sat there when minutes ago they weren't sure if they were going to live.

I think above the others, this jab against the Enterprise not trying to prevent the Vengeance from crashing is ridiculous and unfair.

Click to expand...

You didn't get the memo? Apparently Star Trek fans are so fucking stupid and lacking in imagination now that we have to have everything explained to us in mind-numbing detail.

It's become somewhat of a staple of post-9/11 TV and film to include large numbers of casualties. But going way back, TOS had insanely huge numbers casualties, although it always happened off-screen. In Wrath of Khan, Khan tortured and murdered the Regula staff and probably the Reliant crew as well, but of course we don't see it. Now it's all more immediate.

And I'd say the Enterprise was utterly incapable of doing anything but "sit there" when the Vengeance flew past. It took a whole year to repair her. What could they have done?

Sounds like a situation our characters have to think their way out of. We don't have weapons, we barely have moving power and there's not enough time to warn San Francisco about the danger they're in. What do we have? A crippled, badly damaged Enterprise that can now move and a tractor beam that isn't powerful enough to completely stop the Vengeance on it's own. But we do have those two things working so we can do something with them. What if we get the Enterprise positioned over the Vengeance, lock onto an area of the saucer section with the tractor beam and use every working engine left to push the Vengeance down into the Ocean? The Vengeance doesn't have the power for vertical control, so why not give that idea a shot? Heck, you could use the footage of the Vengeance crashing into the water as it is shown and just cut to a shot of the Enterprise above it being the force that's pushing it down and make a new shot of the Vengeance coming to a dead stop before it hits the city. Khan can still jump out of the ship and you can still have your foot chase.

Sounds like a situation our characters have to think their way out of. We don't have weapons, we barely have moving power and there's not enough time to warn San Francisco about the danger they're in. What do we have? A crippled, badly damaged Enterprise that can now move and a tractor beam that isn't powerful enough to completely stop the Vengeance on it's own. But we do have those two things working so we can do something with them. What if we get the Enterprise positioned over the Vengeance, lock onto an area of the saucer section with the tractor beam and use every working engine left to push the Vengeance down into the Ocean? The Vengeance doesn't have the power for vertical control, so why not give that idea a shot? Heck, you could use the footage of the Vengeance crashing into the water as it is shown and just cut to a shot of the Enterprise above it being the force that's pushing it down and make a new shot of the Vengeance coming to a dead stop before it hits the city. Khan can still jump out of the ship and you can still have your foot chase.

Click to expand...

But this adds absolutely nothing to the film and actually bogs it down. Plus, then you'd have people bitching about how starships don't work that way.

Sounds like a situation our characters have to think their way out of. We don't have weapons, we barely have moving power and there's not enough time to warn San Francisco about the danger they're in. What do we have? A crippled, badly damaged Enterprise that can now move and a tractor beam that isn't powerful enough to completely stop the Vengeance on it's own. But we do have those two things working so we can do something with them. What if we get the Enterprise positioned over the Vengeance, lock onto an area of the saucer section with the tractor beam and use every working engine left to push the Vengeance down into the Ocean? The Vengeance doesn't have the power for vertical control, so why not give that idea a shot? Heck, you could use the footage of the Vengeance crashing into the water as it is shown and just cut to a shot of the Enterprise above it being the force that's pushing it down and make a new shot of the Vengeance coming to a dead stop before it hits the city. Khan can still jump out of the ship and you can still have your foot chase.

Click to expand...

Do you honestly believe a crash into the Ocean or the bay is going to be any less devastating? When you crash a big ship into the ocean or the bay, from orbit, you are going to create Tidal waves, which are going to cause just as much damage, plus using that much power would probably re-cripple the Enterprise and she would've crashed too, increasing the damage done. As was stated, it took an entire year to repair her, she didn't just have a scrape here and there, it was major damage. She barely had mobility, and the tractor beam would've likely drug them down with the Vengeance

Like BillJ said, it adds nothing and in my opinion would have caused some sort of tone mismatch. It had been tragic up until now and slowly descending into wrath on part of Spock. To suddenly make it a rescue mission would shift the tone to a more hopeful one and I think this sudden shift would damage the movie. Besides...

But this adds absolutely nothing to the film and actually bogs it down. Plus, then you'd have people bitching about how starships don't work that way.

Click to expand...

Sure it does. It gives the Enterprise a moment where it actually did something to stop the Vengeance.

ComicGuy89 said:

To suddenly make it a rescue mission would shift the tone to a more hopeful one and I think this sudden shift would damage the movie

Click to expand...

Isn't that what we get in the film anyways? We have a tragic, quiet death of Kirk followed immediately by another action set piece with Spock trying to kill Khan out of vengeance which than turns into a rescue mission to save Kirk. If you think having two shifts in tone is too much, I'll understand that better. But don't say that shifting tone on it's own is a bad thing, because that's exactly what the film did.

But this adds absolutely nothing to the film and actually bogs it down. Plus, then you'd have people bitching about how starships don't work that way.

Click to expand...

Sure it does. It gives the Enterprise a moment where it actually did something to stop the Vengeance.

Click to expand...

It really doesn't add anything to the film. I can tell with my eyes that the Enterprise was in no shape to stop it.

I think people confuse what they'd like to see with what would make a good movie. I would've loved to have gotten more in-depth information on the Nibiru mission, seen the arguments, seen the development of the volcano device. But just because those things might be of interest to me personally, doesn't mean that it is good for the film.

We don't even get a "There's not much power!" or anything as to why the Enterprise didn't try and prevent the Vengeance from crashing. They just sit there.

Click to expand...

That was a big problem. They stop the Enterprise from falling and then they waste 5 minutes to watch Kirk die. In the meantime, the Vengeance falls to Earth as well (and why exactly did it take 10 minutes longer than the Enterprise?), and they do nothing to stop it.

To suddenly make it a rescue mission would shift the tone to a more hopeful one and I think this sudden shift would damage the movie

Click to expand...

Isn't that what we get in the film anyways? We have a tragic, quiet death of Kirk followed immediately by another action set piece with Spock trying to kill Khan out of vengeance which than turns into a rescue mission to save Kirk. If you think having two shifts in tone is too much, I'll understand that better. But don't say that shifting tone on it's own is a bad thing, because that's exactly what the film did.

Click to expand...

When I made the point about the tone, I made sure to add some qualifiers. I never said tone shifting was a bad thing. From my previous post, I said it's tone mismatch that would cause a problem:

Like BillJ said, it adds nothing and in my opinion would have caused some sort of tone mismatch. It had been tragic up until now and slowly descending into wrath on part of Spock. To suddenly make it a rescue mission would shift the tone to a more hopeful one and I think this sudden shift would damage the movie.

Click to expand...

Yes there was a tone of hope in the climax but that came after the whole issue of Spock going nuts was played out. In my opinion, what you are suggesting is this:

I think the hopeful tone in the middle with the rescue mission distorts the progression entirely, the audience is yanked from sorrow to hope and suddenly back to anger. Like negative, positive, negative, positive. It's almost bipolar. It will make the rescue mission feel horribly out of place.

We don't even get a "There's not much power!" or anything as to why the Enterprise didn't try and prevent the Vengeance from crashing. They just sit there.

Click to expand...

That was a big problem. They stop the Enterprise from falling and then they waste 5 minutes to watch Kirk die. In the meantime, the Vengeance falls to Earth as well (and why exactly did it take 10 minutes longer than the Enterprise?), and they do nothing to stop it.

Click to expand...

Yea, Sulu and Chekov should've gotten out and pushed, obviously they were just being lazy.

We don't even get a "There's not much power!" or anything as to why the Enterprise didn't try and prevent the Vengeance from crashing. They just sit there.

Click to expand...

That was a big problem. They stop the Enterprise from falling and then they waste 5 minutes to watch Kirk die. In the meantime, the Vengeance falls to Earth as well (and why exactly did it take 10 minutes longer than the Enterprise?), and they do nothing to stop it.

Click to expand...

Yea, Sulu and Chekov should've gotten out and pushed, obviously they were just being lazy.

Click to expand...

Because they did nothing, they were also just extremely lucky that the Vengeance didn't crash into them.

We don't even get a "There's not much power!" or anything as to why the Enterprise didn't try and prevent the Vengeance from crashing. They just sit there.

Click to expand...

That was a big problem. They stop the Enterprise from falling and then they waste 5 minutes to watch Kirk die. In the meantime, the Vengeance falls to Earth as well (and why exactly did it take 10 minutes longer than the Enterprise?), and they do nothing to stop it.

Click to expand...

Are we really nitpicking for the sake of it?

Sulu and the bridge crew simply didn't have the Vengeance on their mind. After all, their (and the audience's) focus had been on the Enterprise desperately trying to survive. And immediately after that, their captain dying.

The fact that you mentioned the Vengeance barely missing the Enterprise showed that nobody remembered it was there. They are only human, even robots like Data wouldn't be able to recover from such a serious incident so quickly, in 5 minutes. Do you know how short 5 minutes is?

I think movies can't be so upbeat with such destruction and obvious loss of life. Clark Kent smiling, Kirk and his crew excited about a new mission. Sure, events have passed but basically our heroes lost.

Superman saved the human race from annihilation and was ready to come out in the open (hence Lois saying "welcome to the planet"). The Enterprise defeated Khan, Admiral Marcus was dead, and there is renewed optimism for the future. How did the heroes lose exactly?

Superman saved the human race from annihilation and was ready to come out in the open (hence Lois saying "welcome to the planet"). The Enterprise defeated Khan, Admiral Marcus was dead, and there is renewed optimism for the future. How did the heroes lose exactly?

Click to expand...

Kirk was the one that led the Vengeance back to Earth, and released Khan from his cell. Kirk's crew got Khan on board a ship he had "inate knowledge of", as Spock said, lining him up to take over the Vengence, which Khan then used to kill thousands of people ... yeah, they prevented Marcus from starting a war with the Klingons, but it was at great cost - I wouldn't call it a victory, and Kirk all excited for his new five year mission at the end of the didn't jive to me, in light of the destruction his enemy had caused - a man he released from a jail cell - most people, no matter if they stopped the "bad guy", would be dealing with the feelings of guilt over the deaths the villain had caused, especially since they had captured him successfully, but then let him go. I would think Kirk would be questioning himself, wondering, "I wonder what would have happened if I had actually just turned Khan over to Marcus - would the admiral maybe have spared my ship, regardless of what he said later, about never planning to spare the Enterprise? Or if I had run to another Federation area, instead of Earth? How many lives on Earth would have been spared, if I had just taken the ship to a starbase instead of Earth? Was trying to save Khan and make sure he faced true and fair justice worth the thousands of innocent lives lost in San Fransisco?". Kirk would likely have had to face these questions, and to explain his reasons for releasing Khan to grieving families who lost family members in those skyscrapers... definitely not a victory for the Enterprise crew, except they did arguably prevent a war with the Klingons ... for now ... but a victory for the Enterprise ... no, I'd say ...

Superman saved the human race from annihilation and was ready to come out in the open (hence Lois saying "welcome to the planet"). The Enterprise defeated Khan, Admiral Marcus was dead, and there is renewed optimism for the future. How did the heroes lose exactly?

Click to expand...

Kirk was the one that led the Vengeance back to Earth, and released Khan from his cell. Kirk's crew got Khan on board a ship he had "inate knowledge of", as Spock said, lining him up to take over the Vengence, which Khan then used to kill thousands of people ... yeah, they prevented Marcus from starting a war with the Klingons, but it was at great cost - I wouldn't call it a victory, and Kirk all excited for his new five year mission at the end of the didn't jive to me, in light of the destruction his enemy had caused - a man he released from a jail cell - most people, no matter if they stopped the "bad guy", would be dealing with the feelings of guilt over the deaths the villain had caused, especially since they had captured him successfully, but then let him go. I would think Kirk would be questioning himself, wondering, "I wonder what would have happened if I had actually just turned Khan over to Marcus - would he maybe have spared my ship, regardless of what he said later? Or if I had run to another Federation area, instead of Earth? How many lives on Earth would have been spared, if I had just taken the ship to a starbase instead of Earth?". Kirk would likely have had to explain his reasons for releasing Khan to grieving families who lost family members in those skyscrapers... definitely not a victory for the Enterprise crew, and their smiles at the end of the movie don't jive with the tone of the destruction caused ...

Click to expand...

Marcus made it clear: He was going to kill the Enterprise crew. So we get:

They hand Khan and the 72 torps over, Marcus kills everyone...

A) He starts a war with the Klingon Empire, costing countless lives--far more than the crash of the Vengeance--and Earth still still ends up on the firing line.

B) Khan kills Marcus, wakes his crew. Now we have a genocidal madman with a super ship that might get stopped but not before he scorches a good bit of the planet and kills God only knows how many Starfleet crew in the process.

Body count still ends up higher. They run to another sector, the above plays out the same.